The Dogma of Japanese Insignificance: The Academic Discourse on North Korea Policy Coordination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
apan's postwar development has been quite astonishing. The journey from military defeat to economic success only took twenty or so years to accomplish. Yet some international relations (IR) scholars have been rather surprised by the fact that Japan failed to fulfil what they prophesized namely, to develop political and military power commensurate with its great economic capability. This is why realist Kenneth Waltz has given Japan the epithet of structural anomaly.2 The Japanese anomaly is epitomized in (and sometimes also explained as a result of) Japan's historical legacy, including the promulgation of a pacifist constitution with its warrenouncing Article 9, the enactment of three anti-nuclear principles in 1967, and the three principles prohibiting the export of weapons in 1967 and 1976, and the fact that, in principle, Japanese defense expenditure occupies only 1 percent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) . The image of Japanese insignificance in international affairs reactivity, passivity, dependence or even non-existence is reproduced in many different literatures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".